No hardware modification required. Just add two software rules:
full priority to the destination floor selected inside the elevator 1 when at the garage level or at the roof level
full priority to the elevator call buttons at the garage level and the roof level
This way the elevator 1 will not be affected by people pressing both buttons on all ...
I'm going to add yet another option, to address a separate aspect of the problem. (If you think this doesn't cover something, please read my other two answers before commenting to that effect.)
Part of the reason people hit both call buttons is because they can and without thinking.
Even if the buttons have different labels, they have the same affordance, ...
It strikes me that these are both binary options. In that you can have closest OR cheapest as a sort and premium OR regular as a filter.
Maybe you could find some sort of UI device that would allow the user just to tap the sort or the filter to switch each option to its binary opposite. "Premium would switch to "Regular" when touched once and ...
Elevator1 Elevator2 Elevator3 Elevator4
~4 min ~1 min ~3 min ~3 min
The problem seems to be people believing they get a benefit out of pressing both buttons, when in fact they will not. I think this can be addressed by communicating the state of things more clearly. By displaying an estimated waiting time for ...
I suspect that the other difference elevator one has is that its load limit is 1000 pounds greater than the other three. (There should be a small plaque somewhere, or a notation on the certificate.)
In short, it is the freight elevator.
Large deliveries, movers, etc use this elevator (and usually get the key to lock it out). The loading dock is in the ...
Is it really necessary to take Elevator 1 directly from any floor if your eventual destination is the carpark or rooftop?
What about simply changing elevators on the ground or top floor? So there's no "call rooftop" or "call carpark" buttons on the floors.
Instead every elevator has "carpark" and "rooftop" buttons, but ...
If any solution goes
Make all four elevators equal in size and floors they attend. Then you only need a single button and everyone will be treated equally.
Similar to a disabled toilet, which we'd all use if it's free and no other toilets are available, you would refrain if there was a disabled person inside or in line.
If you can find a way ...
I think this is especially tough because the combination of these issues:
E1 is the only way to access the roof and garage
E1 is the main intended elevator for for wheelchairs/strollers/accessibility
E1 is associated with panel A AND panel B
I'm going to assume that most users already have some way of knowing (existing labeling?) that E1 is the appropriate ...
2 separate answers:
My building has a similar set of elevators. The #1 elevator is on the north side of the building and the #2-4 elevators are on the south side. No one presses all 4 buttons.
I recall a building I visited that charged $0.10 for using the elevator. If there was a per call charge - even a nominal amount - then people would probably stop ...
This cannot just be solved with UX as your users already know. If you kicked everyone in the building out, then some of the other answers would work for sure. To alter your knowledgeable users you need to change the UX and the functionality and reprogram them.
My suggestion is a little bit simplistic.
It would include a brief bulletin or plaque outside ...
Building on @eskew 's excellent answer, as long as privacy is not a concern, why not simply move the full floor selector panel entirely to the outside of the elevator, instead of having multiple directional buttons on the outside and floor buttons on the inside? That would reduce input to a single interaction.
Every panel on every floor would have ...
If this is not clear - this is bad solution.
Of course this is just a mockup.
Add accessibility icon at Panel A as most people respect this mark and will not use marked buttons.
Add notice to Panel B for rooftop and garage to make clear what to do - explicit allowance to use Panel A appropriate buttons.
Panel A button pairs Up and ...
Panel "A" - Calls elevator 1
Panel "B" - Calls elevators 1-4
Panel "A+B" - May end up calling two elevators
Below are 2 proposed fixes, intended to be used at the same time.
If a user pushes any button on any panel, the corresponding light will turn on.
If a user pushes a direction on panel "A"...
I propose disconnecting the panel B from elevator 1. This would at least reduce the duplicated floors from panel B.
When there are a lot of people waiting, as a common user I would most
likely see that both panels are pressed and has higher chance of
using elevator 2,3,4
In the minor case of going to the rooftop, basement and using the
wheelchair. I would ...
Many of the proposed solutions involve combining the panels or relabeling Elevator 1's controls. The problem with this is accessibility: anyone who needs the larger car (especially if they are not tenants -- visitors or delivery people mostly) may not understand they have to use that panel to get Elevator 1 if their destination isn't one of the specially-...
I think the functionality of the elevators and two panels are fine. The issue is with user behavior.
You have two sets of users:
Users who are in a wheelchair or want to go to roof or basement.
Users not in set 1. ie. non-wheelchair users who want to go to general floors.
For each set of users, we want to encourage and discourage a certain behavior.
Make panel B light up the buttons on both panels, summon any elevator, and have both go out when any elevator answers.
Make panel A light up only panel A, and summon only elevator 1.
Make elevator 1 responding to a panel A summons or use NOT respond to panel B summons. This mode would probably end when either the elevator is closed and not ...
Key-switches. Replace the call buttons with key-switches at all levels except Garage, Lobby and Roof. Yes, there's a loophole, in that people can summon it to the lobby and use it as a normal elevator to ascend to any floor. But it won't be stopping empty at all intermediate floors unless somebody with the appropriate key called it there. You could prevent ...
This is a people problem.
This can be fixed by using some scotch tape and a piece of paper which reads:
Please use this panel only if you need roof or basement access, or need extra space for a wheelchair or other large belongings.
Thank you for your consideration.
It is also slightly larger in size than the other 3 elevators, to
accommodate wheelchair-using residents and strollers.
Based on the above statement (emphasis on slightly is mine) I take it that the other three elevators can be used by wheelchair-using residents and strollers.
So, on floors other than rooftop and basement, we can dedicate elevator 1 for ...
The heart of the problem is that people going to every floor except the roof & basement will on average get better service by pressing both buttons. Any modification needs to remove that incentive, or remove the ability of inappropriate users to "double call".
For the floors other than lobby, I would make the selectors mutually exclusive: ...
In an office building where I worked, they solved a similar problem by making panel A a bit less obvious than panel B. Panel B was right out in the open, on the wall between two of the elevators, facing the lobby.
Panel A was located in the kind of door jamb space of elevator 1, perpendicular and right next to the elevator doors.
On further thought, another solution could be to implement a singular, digital wall panel where users can indicate to which specific floor they are intending to go, much like the ones found in many newer high-rise office buildings and hotels:
Original image by Access Matters on Flickr, used under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.
Once the floor is selected, the main ...
I'd put a timer / a usage sensor in the circuits for Elevator 1 during peak periods, so once its been called it will always go directly to the set destination ( the roof or the basement )
Anything to do with trying to get users to modify their pattern of behaviour is going to be too complex.
EDIT: this doesn't address the disabled usage issue which I couldn'...
The first user who plays a course should do the manual work of entering the par and yards for each hole. The app should save it and remember its configuration.
Every subsequent user should just tell the app which course they’re playing, and the app should find it and pull it up for them. If they want to edit their instance of the course, they can start with ...
I'd argue that something like an auto scroll could be rather confusing for any user and should not be used in a case like this. Especially not if there are multiple errors.
A better solution would surely be to highlight with a clearly visible list what went wrong ie what field is missing input or contain faulty characters. This highlight should be positioned ...
I Think the design could be improve by simply adding the Label "OPEN"/"CLOSE" to the button.
In Automation when we have a system that can be open and close we simply have one button named "OPEN" and one button named "CLOSE", this is the best way to avoid the user to have to understand the icon or guess what it mean.